Stupid question

J

jamesmallonuk

Well-known member
Its a stupid question but I was wondering why primes don't have some kind of stabalization?


*I'm assuming they dont has I have never seen any myself.
 
Maybe some big teles do ?

I think in stills photography the 'culture' is that pros will use a tripod or flash or wide aperture if required to freeze the action - traditional methods

While Ams and ther small ap lenses need all technical help they can get

For stills I have the nikkor 70-200VR - Ive only used VR once on a Times Ed Supp job - frankly I thought it useless something was soft - either the VR shaking the image or the kids moving in the 30th duration of the shot - better a higher ISO and 60th or 125 with it off esp when my D3 is pretty clean at 800 or even 1600 for editorial use

For video I do use IS on my 5d 24-105 for interviews and static shots

lens design has not really caught up with video dslr requirements yet

S
 
Last edited:
In fact, some very long lenses do have IS, like this one: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-300mm-2-8L-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B0000ALKBU

I think that it has to do with lens speed. As Wikipedia says, "In photography, image stabilization can often permit the use of shutter speeds 2–4 stops slower (exposures 4–16 times longer)." With very few exceptions, there are virtually no zoom lenses faster than f/2.8, whereas there are plenty of prime lenses at f/1.4. The purpose of IS in video is very different from what it is in still photography. In video IS is used to minimize or eliminate jittery camera motion in the footage. In photography, IS is used to help control the amount of blur in individual photos.
 
They're generally either wide enough or fast enough to not need IS. Realistically, especially for photography, it makes no sense to add IS to any prime shorter than a 100mm. The only weird one is that Nikon added IS to a 16-35mm. Otherwise, yeah IS isn't needed for photography on a prime or a wide angle.
 
heyrobert said:
They're generally either wide enough or fast enough to not need IS. Realistically, especially for photography, it makes no sense to add IS to any prime shorter than a 100mm.
Click to expand...

Thats just an excuse, not a limitation. Its physically and technically possible. Don't forget Canon's 18-55IS. Nikon supposedly has a 85/1.4 with image stabilization in the works.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top